Paolo Notaro1,2, Carlo Alberto Dell'Agnola3, Alessandro J Dell'Agnola3, Alessio Amatu4, Katia Bruna Bencardino4, Salvatore Siena4. 1. Pain Medicine, Dipartimento di Anestesiologia- Ospedale Niguarda Ca' Granda, Milano, Italy. paolo.notaro@ospedaleniguarda.it. 2. Dipartimento di Terapia del dolore, Ospedale Niguarda Ca' Granda, Piazza Ospedale Maggiore, 3-20162, Milano, Italy. paolo.notaro@ospedaleniguarda.it. 3. Pain Medicine, Dipartimento di Anestesiologia- Ospedale Niguarda Ca' Granda, Milano, Italy. 4. Dipartimento di Ematologia e Oncologia, Niguarda Cancer Center, Ospedale Niguarda Ca' Granda, Milano, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Scrambler therapy is a non-invasive neurocutaneous electrical pain intervention, effective for the treatment of neuropathic pain. Currently, few data about the efficacy of this treatment in cancer pain induced by skeletal and visceral metastases are available. The aim of this single-center case series is to evaluate the efficacy of scrambler therapy in reducing this kind of cancer pain after failure of standard treatments, including pharmacological therapies and radiation therapy. METHODS: Twenty-five consecutive patients underwent scrambler therapy individually delivered by MC5-A Calmare for 10 daily sessions each of 30-40 min. Pain was measured by a numeric rating scale at baseline, as well as before and after each treatment session. RESULTS: One hundred percent of patients reached a pain relief ≥50 %. Pain score was reduced from 8.4 at baseline to 2.9 after treatment, with a mean pain relief of 89 %. The sleeping hours improved from 4.4 ± 1.2 to 7.5 ± 1.1. The duration of pain control by scrambler therapy was 7.7 ± 5.3 weeks. No adverse events were observed. CONCLUSION: Scrambler therapy does not present toxicity and allows opioids dosage reduction, and it is also a repeatable treatment. Present novel data support that scrambler therapy seems to be effective for the treatment of cancer pain. Further evaluation in randomized and controlled clinical trials should be performed to confirm our findings.
PURPOSE: Scrambler therapy is a non-invasive neurocutaneous electrical pain intervention, effective for the treatment of neuropathic pain. Currently, few data about the efficacy of this treatment in cancer pain induced by skeletal and visceral metastases are available. The aim of this single-center case series is to evaluate the efficacy of scrambler therapy in reducing this kind of cancer pain after failure of standard treatments, including pharmacological therapies and radiation therapy. METHODS: Twenty-five consecutive patients underwent scrambler therapy individually delivered by MC5-A Calmare for 10 daily sessions each of 30-40 min. Pain was measured by a numeric rating scale at baseline, as well as before and after each treatment session. RESULTS: One hundred percent of patients reached a pain relief ≥50 %. Pain score was reduced from 8.4 at baseline to 2.9 after treatment, with a mean pain relief of 89 %. The sleeping hours improved from 4.4 ± 1.2 to 7.5 ± 1.1. The duration of pain control by scrambler therapy was 7.7 ± 5.3 weeks. No adverse events were observed. CONCLUSION: Scrambler therapy does not present toxicity and allows opioids dosage reduction, and it is also a repeatable treatment. Present novel data support that scrambler therapy seems to be effective for the treatment of cancer pain. Further evaluation in randomized and controlled clinical trials should be performed to confirm our findings.
Entities:
Keywords:
Calmare®; Electroanalgesia; Metastatic bone and visceral pain; Scrambler therapy; Untreatable cancer pain
Authors: N Attal; G Cruccu; M Haanpää; P Hansson; T S Jensen; T Nurmikko; C Sampaio; S Sindrup; P Wiffen Journal: Eur J Neurol Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 6.089
Authors: Angela R Starkweather; Patrick Coyne; Debra E Lyon; R K Elswick; Kyungeh An; Jamie Sturgill Journal: Res Nurs Health Date: 2015-01-08 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Marianna Ricci; Sara Pirotti; Emanuela Scarpi; Marco Burgio; Marco Maltoni; Elisabetta Sansoni; Dino Amadori Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2011-03-11 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Deirdre R Pachman; Breanna L Weisbrod; Drew K Seisler; Debra L Barton; Kelliann C Fee-Schroeder; Thomas J Smith; Daniel H Lachance; Heshan Liu; Randy A Shelerud; Andrea L Cheville; Charles L Loprinzi Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Robert A Swarm; Amy Pickar Abernethy; Doralina L Anghelescu; Costantino Benedetti; Sorin Buga; Charles Cleeland; Oscar A Deleon-Casasola; June G Eilers; Betty Ferrell; Mark Green; Nora A Janjan; Mihir M Kamdar; Michael H Levy; Maureen Lynch; Rachel M McDowell; Natalie Moryl; Suzanne A Nesbit; Judith A Paice; Michael W Rabow; Karen L Syrjala; Susan G Urba; Sharon M Weinstein; Mary Dwyer; Rashmi Kumar Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Charles Loprinzi; Jennifer G Le-Rademacher; Neil Majithia; Ryan P McMurray; Carrie R O'Neill; Markus A Bendel; Andreas Beutler; Daniel H Lachance; Andrea Cheville; David M Strick; David F Black; Jon C Tilburt; Thomas J Smith Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-06-17 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Maureen A Mealy; Sharon L Kozachik; Lawrence J Cook; Lauren Totonis; Ruth Andrea Salazar; Jerilyn K Allen; Marie T Nolan; Thomas J Smith; Michael Levy Journal: Neurology Date: 2020-04-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Neil Majithia; Thomas J Smith; Patrick J Coyne; Salahadin Abdi; Deirdre R Pachman; Daniel Lachance; Randy Shelerud; Andrea Cheville; Jeffrey R Basford; David Farley; Carrie O'Neill; Kathryn J Ruddy; Frank Sparadeo; Andreas Beutler; Charles L Loprinzi Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-04-04 Impact factor: 3.603